Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2008-03-12-Speech-3-075"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20080312.3.3-075"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, at the end of these discussions I feel we can say there is in fact broad agreement in the House that the Lisbon Strategy ought to be pursued, that it is a success and that we must work harder on it, especially in terms of implementation, particularly the practical implementation by our Member States of the priorities originally set. There are, of course, a number of differences as to emphasis; where should the emphasis be placed? I must, however, underscore the general backing for the Lisbon Strategy and the clear conclusions of the European Parliament that indicate that it is working and that it is our answer to globalisation.
If there have been a number of changes in terms of recent developments, this confirms both the urgent nature of the situation and consequent determination. Here I wish to echo the words of Mr Turmes and Mrs Harms, among others, and state that social issues must not be played off against environmental issues. The problem of energy or energy-intensive industries merits a separate reply.
We want competitive European industry. Our aim is not for Europe to become an industrial wasteland: quite the contrary, in fact. Our goal is ‘greening’, an industry that can turning its sights towards achieving a new compatibility with our targets in terms of fighting climate change. It would be a huge error to view the competitiveness of European industry as contrary to the fight against climate change. That is why in our proposals, and the Commission has stated this clearly, we support specific guarantees for energy-intensive industries. We do not want to see our industries moving away to other parts of the world.
Now we need to know what our main objective is at this stage. Our objective is to have a global agreement on climate change and to participate in the Copenhagen Climate Change Conference with proposals that will encourage others to move. However, if there is no global agreement, we are prepared to take protective measures – and I am not afraid of using the word – for the benefit of Europe’s energy-intensive industries.
Finally, ladies and gentlemen, we must hold our course. I wish to thank all those who stressed the importance of holding our course, especially Mr Ferber, Mr Karas and many others. The Lisbon Strategy is a strategy for all seasons. The greatest danger would be to take a step backwards now in the face of a new global economic situation.
What we must do, on the contrary, is hold our course for the European economic reforms, but these must be economic reforms for an open Europe, a more socially inclusive Europe, a Europe that is more resolute as regards the environment. We see no contradiction between these objectives: quite the reverse, in fact. We feel that we must now focus on implementing the Strategy. It has been a sound Strategy and it will continue to be sound in terms of social, economic and environmental development in Europe.
I must underline the substance of the issue, and first and foremost Europe’s attitude to globalisation. The fact of the matter is that, even in a more difficult economic climate, due to financial instability in particular, European exports are increasing and Europe is still far and away the leading recipient of foreign direct investment. Europe has assets at its disposal to deal with globalisation. We must therefore maintain our course, and I wish to thank all those who have so clearly supported this posture, especially Mr Daul, Mr Watson and so many others.
Protective Europe must also be protected now, as a number of you, including Mr Désir, pointed out. We agree on this point; the question is how to protect it. We believe that we can protect Europe not by shutting ourselves off but by enabling others to open up as we are opening up. That is the issue.
Europe, the world’s largest trading power, with steadily increasing exports, cannot now embrace protectionism. That would be against our own interests. The best solution is to make sure that others open up themselves, not only in relation to trade and access to their markets, but also in more ambitious environmental terms and in terms of social rights.
Internally we can of course do more within the social framework, and I wish to say that the message the Commission will take to the European Council is a message of social commitment. In particular, we are in favour of a social agenda based on access, solidarity and opportunity.
Some of you mentioned the Laval case. I must tell you again what I have already said to you many times, and what I also said when addressing the Swedish Parliament: the Commission’s interpretation of the Laval case is not, as a number of people have suggested, a contradiction between the principles of the internal market and the principle of defending workers’ rights.
On the contrary, we feel that the flexicurity model and, in a general sense, what is known as the Scandinavian model of labour relations, is a progressive model that has produced some excellent results in Europe. It is our plan, we are anxious to state, to combat all forms of social dumping. There can be no doubt about the Commission’s position on this matter.
I thus wish to emphasise this aspect, for it seems to me we must avoid at all costs falling into the trap of viewing the social aspects as being contrary to competitiveness in Europe. As several of you mentioned, including Mr Crowley and others, we need an open Europe with an open economy and society, but we also need a Europe that welcomes social inclusion. Let us therefore resist this tendency.
Let us also resist the tendency to play social aspects off against environmental aspects. Here I wish to emphasise the Commission’s determination. We are absolutely to determined to follow through the commitments made unanimously by the European Council in March last year. During Mrs Merkel’s German Presidency there was unanimous support for a number of targets. What I can tell you is that during the next phase the Commission will be even more determined to build a genuine European energy policy and to combat climate change."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples